British Battleship Design 1840–1904
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11935885 |
|---|---|
| Authors | David K Brown (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1981 |
| Volume | 6 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 79-93 |
| Publication date | 1981-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Interdisciplinary Science Reviews (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0308-0188 • E-ISSN: 1743-2790 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1179/isr.1981.6.1.79 |
| OpenAlex | W2037837883 |
| Language | EN |
The growth in size of battleships during the latter half of the nineteenth century was unsteady and this is often portrayed as due to the irrational whims of admirals and naval architects. With few exceptions, this growth and the changes of style were the result of technical developments in metallurgy, propellants for guns, machinery and of the laws of naval architecture. Better materials, used more efficiently with a more informed selection of dimension enabled the naval architect to produce a hull which was lighter, and hence could carry more than its predecessors. Their interdisciplinary interplay is here discussed. The naval architect was one of the first professional engineers to embrace all disciplines and to see his task as primarily one of putting together the work of other engineers while still advancing in his own specialization. The development of the naval architect was achieved by a ruthless and competitive examination system in academic subjects, combined with intensive practical work
Aeronautics · Art · Engineering ethics · Hull · Irrational number · Management · Marine engineering · Naval architecture · Operations research · Visual arts · Work (physics · Engineering · Maritime and Coastal Archaeology · Architecture · Mechanical Engineering
| Highly cited | No |
|---|